The allegation: that HuffPo is ripping off bloggers who’ve agreed to write for the site. Tasini hopes to win class-action status for the suit, filed on behalf of more than 9,000 writers and other content providers. He is looking for at least $105 million. Click here for the complaint; here for David Lat’s writeup at Above the Law; here for the NYT’s squib on the suit; here for a take over at Forbes.

Now, the somewhat strange thing about the suit: Tasini acknowledges that he and others have been given what they were promised by the defendants. In exchange for their words, HuffPo promised to give the writers . . . wait for it . . . exactly nothing. Nothing, that is, outside of the exposure that would naturally accrue from having one’s byline below a piece on a well-trafficked website.

In other words, the legal “cause of action” is not breach of contract. Nor is it rooted in some New York new media law meant to compensate all those hard-working scriveners looking to make names for themselves.

No, the cause of action — which doesn’t officially show up until deep deep deep in the complaint — is based on a somewhat murky legal concept known as “unjust enrichment.” The claim is meant to return money when one was “enriched unjustly” because of some fluke — a mistake of law or mistake of fact or if work is performed under duress. In other words, even though HuffPo never promised a dime to the 9,000 writers, it’s unfair that AOL and others would nevertheless be able to profit off of their work.

All this said, Tasini acknowledges that it’s not all about landing a $105 million payday. As Forbes writer Jeff Bercovici observes:

Tasini says the goal of is suit is not just to win a slice of the pie for Huffpo’s contributors but to ensure, in a world where writers are increasingly expected to be willing to write for free, that they are still able to share in any wealth they create. “This lawsuit is about establishing justice for the bloggers of the Huffington Post and establishing a standard going forward,” he says. “If we want to have a society that has a diverse, vibrant culture, we have to make sure the people that create the content, whether it be words, images, drawings, photographs – those people have to be compensated fairly.”

Mario Ruiz, a spokesman for the site, said the following in regard to the suit:

The lawsuit is wholly without merit. As we’ve said before, our bloggers use our platform — as well as other unpaid group blogs across the web — to connect and help their work be seen by as many people as possible. It’s the same reason people go on TV shows: to promote their views and ideas.